Home > Contributors > Blog

Blog

AlamyUpload - Honest folks, we are working on it.

Permalink Comments (60)24 January 2007 at 16:54 by Alan Capel
Posted under Boring but necessary announcements

Wembley Stadium construction- Image AR2HF2 © ACE STOCK LIMITED
© ACE STOCK LIMITEDFirst and foremost, we would like to whole heartedly apologise for the delay in providing an online upload service for your images. We had hoped to have the system up and running in 2006, but encountered some unexpected problems. We were happy with the way the system worked but once multiple users were logged on at the same time, we were not happy with the speed and efficiency of the system.

We are currently working on fixing these issues and plan to get feedback from some of you soon.

We often get contributors offering to help with testing. Although this is appreciated, we have specific profiles of contributor needed so it is far more effective for us to select and invite rather than take you up on offers ad hoc. We know you only want to help but this is the best option!

Any updates will be posted on the blog as they become available. We thank you for your continued patience. For now please continue to send in your images via CD or DVD.

Top

Add your own commentComments (60)

  1. 24 January 2007 at 17:06 idmurray

    I was wondering whether you would find it easier to accept uploads ( at least some of them) via specialist third party 'hubs' rather than direct via so many contributor phone connections. Specifically, I've been uploading high res images to Photoshelter for archiving, direct sales and distribution to agencies. Once uploaded at my connection speed I can distribute at their super fast speed. I'm not one for technical detail but wondered if this might make the task easier for you. For example, through negotiation with these potential partners a contributor could transfer files into an Alamy account area and they could sit there until you downloaded them to suit your workflow- rather than have to face an unknown number of people trying to upload at any time. I'm not sure that that makes sense but if it does I hope it helps!

  2. 24 January 2007 at 18:18 dave j

    idmurray. I think it would make it much harder. Its the software interface that counts, not the number of phone connections. Rather than being in control of a single software interface which individuals are obliged to use in the same way, Alamy would need to open up many interfaces to many hubs. They would all be different and since the interface has to be negotiated, they are not in control.

  3. 24 January 2007 at 18:42 idmurray

    Fair enough Dave. It was just a thought and I hope that when the system comes in I will be able to sned my images from Photoshelter as it will just involve one upload for me.

    What exactly is the problem for Alamy? Is it sheer numbers and scale? People tell me that set up an upload system is comparatively straightforward but that is obviously not the case. Perhaps if the nature of the problems was shared somebody might have an idea.

  4. 24 January 2007 at 18:53 Bill Brooks

    Digital upload may be sexy, but is it necessary except for hard news photos? For a photographer sending gigs of images a month the cost/benefits are about the same for digital cable upload as mailing a monthly DVD from Canada

  5. 24 January 2007 at 21:09 Mike

    Re: Bill
    Digital upload is in my opinion a must nowadays since almost all other sites have it. In order to mantain attraction with normal submitters (not agencies) Alamy needs to offer the same almost immediate delivery satisfaction that the other sites offer.

  6. 24 January 2007 at 21:33 Bettina

    Upload via third-party sites is IMO not viable given the size of files we're sending. And why would I want to sign up to Photobucket or whatever other space there is in the first place and then take another step to transfer the data to Alamy.

    Bill mentioned hard news pictures - great. I'd love to submit these to Alamy but if the online approval takes the same amount of time as the current CD approval (as mentioned at the Alamy meetings at the LCC), they're not hard news any more when they're up on site. Maybe an Alamy News section would be something to consider.

    I'd rather wait until you guys get the system up and running 100% than getting stuck during the upload which is way more frustrating than Royal Mail ... I'm sure that someone will correct me on this issue. ;-)

  7. 24 January 2007 at 21:49 Paul

    Thanks for the info and continued hope for the new upload system. I must say this blog vastly improves my perception of free and open communication between contributors and Alamy. Nothing more frustrating that a canned response (which is probably necessary when answering the same question 100 times!).

  8. 24 January 2007 at 22:24 Fred

    Alamy has been working on Internet uploads for years - starting back with FTP somewhere around 2003. During this time the whole microstock industry has started and flourished based on Internet uploads and quick image reviews. Maybe Alamy should seek out some of those programmers for the Internet upload code?

  9. 24 January 2007 at 22:43 Antonio

    I know that this system Alamy is working on is a huge undertaking, given the amount of imagery they must receive on a daily basis, but I really want them to get this up and running ASAP. One of the things that keeps me from submitting regularly is the fact that mailing images on DVD is so cumbersome and, in fact, inconvenient, that I just wait until I have a large batch of images to submit. I would rather submit an image a day, like I do to Flickr, than a whole bunch at once.

    Anyway, I know they are working hard. Maybe soon we'll see the fruits...

  10. 24 January 2007 at 22:44 idmurray

    "Upload via third-party sites is IMO not viable given the size of files we're sending. And why would I want to sign up to Photobucket or whatever other space there is in the first place and then take another step to transfer the data to Alamy. "

    Don't get your first point. You upload once and then send to multiple sites automatically if you want to. Once up they get sent very quickly. JPEG 10s aren't that huge. Photobucket is storage device. I referred to Photoshelter. DigitalRailroad is another.

    Until we know what the problems are that Alamy are having its difficult to know what to say except good luck with it.

  11. 25 January 2007 at 00:52 Luc Novovitch

    I think idmurray has a point.
    Also, if Alamy has a set up allowing hundreds of visitors to check and download pictures simultaneously, I don't see why they could not set up an efficient ftp site. And they can still consult with people who know how to do it, if their inhouse techies are coming short :-)

  12. 25 January 2007 at 03:30 DiscoVolante

    Just wanted to give a shout out and tell you guys to make it happen BUT make it right. I came from a background of testing and realize that doing the job right the first time around is so important in the long run.

    If you need any testers for your beta site just let me know and I would be happy to assist. This is some exciting stuff you are trying and I would be happy to be a guinea pig.

    Good luck!

  13. 25 January 2007 at 06:40 Hristin Slavkov

    So Alamy upload comming soon, great job Alamy team. I can`t wait to start upload.
    Wish you good luck :-)

  14. 25 January 2007 at 08:00 Jon Bower

    Folks, I sincerely hope that upload is voluntary, so that DVD/CD submission is still possible. This will remain a damn sight easier for me, and for many other users, even with broadband.

    For the vast majority of non-news images, I really think we might be lowering quality again for the sake of some extra speed - which is actually irrelevant in most circumstances.

    I'm not too keen on jpeg12s, but jpeg 10s?? Do me a favour- if we go this route, why am I bothering in the first place to shoot RAW with full-frame bodies and L-series lenses, then spend ages in post-processing and optimisation anyway?

    Let's not be silly; the rate-determining step in the submission process is the QA/QC anyway! So the speed arguments just doesn't wash.

    Another triumph for convenience over quality...

    Best

  15. 25 January 2007 at 08:11 idmurray

    When this was first announced last April/May it was also announced that when the upload system was in place Alamy would no longer accept submissions on physical media- CD/DVD/hard discs- except in exceptional circumstances. There are still lots of people on 56k dial up and the slowest broadband connections. If they are able to send their DVD/CD or hard disc to a local hub provider and get their images uploaded there it is then very easy to transfer to Alamy. What other options do such people have if media submissions to Alamy are stopped? I don't know about others but for Photoshelter all I need is an ftp address and I can send images anywhere VERY fast using their connection not mine. This just comes with the package and needs no special arrangement. All I would need is an Alamy ftp space for my name. I'm just throwing this method of delivery into the ring as it could well meet some people's needs and might also lighten the load from Alamy's perspective. I'm NOT advocating it for all. Having alternatives for different situations seem good to me.

  16. 25 January 2007 at 08:15 idmurray

    Jon - our messages just crossed. I send JPEG 12 but Alamy accept 10. Customers get something like JPEG 8 ( 1-3 Mb file)? I too note the irony of this sacrifice of quality at the last step of the process. We wait to hear if physical media will still be accepted. I hope so. As I said having alternatives os goof from my perspective. But it might be that this fails to give the efficiency and cost savings desired by Alamy.

  17. 25 January 2007 at 09:05 Nichola Salvato

    sounds great, looking forward to hearing more

  18. 25 January 2007 at 12:40 dave j

    Luc Novovitch

    Assuming you're a contributor like me your experience is probably that you send in by order of magnitude greater volumes than you sell... :-) The volume problem is different on the incoming side.

    Also judging by the trading statement, even account sales average about 3 photos per transaction.

    I usually sent in anywhere from 20 - 150 on 1 CD / DVD.

    Cheers, Dave

  19. 25 January 2007 at 13:19 Luc Novovitch

    Jon wrote:
    "why am I bothering in the first place to shoot RAW with full-frame bodies and L-series lenses"

    For quality. We both know that shooting in RAW allows us the maximum of control over the processing of your file. I'm convinced that what makes a difference, and set apart the pros from the week-end photographers, is the quality of the end product. Which brings up the question of quality vs quantity on Alamy. The so-called quality control on Alamy should not just be a check on the file size, to make sure it's >48Mb. What about the content and quality of images? If it becomes a dumping ground where anybody and his cousin can send pictures, we'll all pay for it in the end, Alamy and the serious contributors.
    Maybe there is a clue to grasp from the first picture they posted to illustrate the launch of the blog, not even from an Alamy contributor, but signed 'Corbis Premium Collection'. Maybe it's time for Alamy to have its own 'premium collection', for right managed quality images.

  20. 25 January 2007 at 13:20 Johnny T

    Sending in submissions over the the last couple of years has never been a problem, and like clockwork, Alamy always receive & log my submissions atleast by the second day after postage. Im sure the uploading service will be extremely convenient but Im guessing this will only shave a couple of days off the leadtime to get images "passed". Since there is alot of anticipation for the upload service itself, I think as contributors I think we need to set our expactions and realise that the the "passing" of submitted images wont necessarily be any quicker ? than the postage time, if anything it may slow down a fraction ? what do others think ?

  21. 25 January 2007 at 13:34 M Itani

    I'm not that excited about uploading my images online I think burning the cd/dvd will be much faster than uploading who needs more time on the computer I hope they won't cancel the media mail option

  22. 25 January 2007 at 13:40 Jon Bower

    Luc, Ian et al- hi

    Spot on, guys, this is because we care about the quality of our final product. I have to say that I share your misgivings. There is always a trade-off between quality and quantity, for photographers and agencies.

    I have the strong feeling that Alamy may be veering a bit too much towards the 'pile it high' selling philosophy. I recognise and appreciate its open and eclectic (and innovative!)philosophy, but get the feeling that things have gone a bit too far.

    After a certain point (wherever that may be...) too many images confuse the customer and dilute sales for all.

    That's why the ever-rising image numbers figure which features so prominently on the home page is a cause for concern rather than triumph....

    This all runs the very real risk of driving the more concientious and quality-oriented contributors elsewhere. Not good.

    Best

  23. 25 January 2007 at 16:07 Mark Scheuern

    Given that the delivery time is a fairly small fraction of the total time it takes for submissions to become live, I don't see a big advantage to FTP uploads. Burning a CD or DVD and mailing it isn't remotely difficult or time-consuming.

    The only advantages I can for the contributor, other than cutting a couple of days off the time, would be being able to send images off in small batches rather than waiting until there's enough to make mailing them worthwhile and the elimination of the occasional source of failure of a CD or DVD being unreadable.

    If, in addition to the ability to upload, there were a mechanism in which editorial/newsy images would quickly be available for sale, then it would be a nice improvement.

  24. 25 January 2007 at 17:12 Fin

    Can we have your blogs reading from the most recent listed first?

    I can foresee that in a few weeks time, if I want to catch up with a discussion, I'll have to trawl through quite a lot of emails before I get to the latest inputs.

  25. 25 January 2007 at 18:49 Pavel Kashaev

    Colleagues, My brain device probably is strongly primitive!!!
    I, fairly, do not understand, what theme for disputes and discussions??? When on Alamy there will be an operating window of direct loading and when it will REALLY work then we and shall discuss this technical opportunity.
    In particular, I very strongly wait for this opportunity because for me it is very inconvenient to send pictures usual mail, from the Russian province it till now is problematic. Therefore I am compelled to suppress in myself aspirations to load much as I would like. I have many interesting themes and series, but I am afraid that my pictures can simply copy at the Russian customs at check!!!. It is a lot of still different nuances. And for those Who wishes to send raw material on disks it is possible to leave old system and to wait... It is useful - well!!! Will die - on that will of history...

  26. 26 January 2007 at 05:12 doug Steley

    Thanks for picking the Multiplex dome of doom for this blog story :-) I hope you are more successful than that are !

    cheers doug

    PS I like being able to send images in on DVD as my internet link is not reliable and I don't understand the system.

    For me a CD/DVD system is still preferable I think there are a lot of photographers round the world who may have similar problems with internet speed.

  27. 26 January 2007 at 09:03 Roberto Aquilano

    For me, I'm axiously waiting the online upload, I hate sending DVDs, and thats the reason for I stopped. I have several hundreds images ready to go, but I was waiting for the online system. AFAIK, there is other people waiting for it. Now, I suppose that I have to revert to the old physical support system. But I'm not really happy about it.

  28. 26 January 2007 at 16:25 Andrew Clark

    For those of us not located in the UK uploading will cut down on the lead time dramatically. If it takes a week or so for the disc to get there, the ability to upload is very attractive.

  29. 26 January 2007 at 16:32 James Goldsmith

    I'm awaiting the upload process, if it is any good, i will happily use it as i hate the trawl to the local Correos office. Also hopefully it will cut down on mistakes made (or at least give the opporunity to rectify quicker), like today i find they have received a submission, only they have quoted the media to be containing only half the number of images i have sent. I now have to send the ones that have not shown up or see if they can rectify the problem. The upload would be easier in this instance i feel.
    As for speed, i would have liked it to be slightly quicker from sending to going live, but i would doubt that it will be, however we shall wait and see.

  30. 26 January 2007 at 17:58 chris

    Hi everybody!

    I want the upload too! It would let me submit images instantly, but for me it could work only partially, as.... I have an internet uploading speed reaching no more than 30 kb/s (on good days), and the provider is the best in Poland (where I live). What would You say if You lived in Poland, not USA for instance?

    I hope Alamy will stay with DVD submissions along with its new internet uploading service (by the way, I submit images to another agency, who use direct uploading from iView Multimedia software - with their called "Uploader" - and I really hope Alamy doest not copy it, as problems one can encounter are rather big ones...). It would be the best if they decide for online (on their web) Java upload or to create a standalone uploading application, but the most informed are those, who tested or are testing it...

    Kid regards to all of You

  31. 27 January 2007 at 18:44 Ann Stevens

    As said above, unfortunately there are some of us still in the internet stoneage. Universal broadband not! Many are still stuck on 'dial-up' or if BB is available it's slow and unreliable, I have the scars to prove it! We're waiting for Wimax, it's our only hope. So please keep CD upload.

  32. 28 January 2007 at 17:05 Jon D-P

    I don't know about anyone else but I love the idea of being able to submit my images online, so much so that I have a stockpile backed up. I belive that it's the likely to be the same for quite a few of you, which in itself will doubtless proove troublesome! in addition I believe for this reason if no other that Alamy maintain the postage submissions option. In addition to the 'stack em high' argument, I think it is important that we keep in mind that all the images, both those beautifully composed and those snaps caught in passing have relevancy. I know from experience that an of the cuff snap can sell hugely but when I took it I was just grabbing a shot, when I submitted it for consideration it was purely because I liked it. Whilst the digital age has made it easier for anyone with the simplest of digital cameras to enter the marketplace, it has also generated some exceptional images which would not have been seen, as well as inspiring a plethora of people to have ago and take those images. Don't take it too seriously, because where we as professionals succeed is in our ability to meet and fufil the brief to interprete and capture the vision. Keep submitting all your images, if only to inspire.

  33. 28 January 2007 at 23:29 Marcus

    I already have had experience of direct uploads via another agency. If I have a photo of breaking news fine as it only takes perhaps 10 15 mins or so. HOWEVER If I have 10 non urgent general stock photos to upload. It would take 2 or 3 hrs. Imagine if I have 100 photos after an overseas excurtion say. I then prefer DVD I post it and its out of my way. This means I dont have to buy a second computer to edit as the first is to busy.
    Lets use both systems!

  34. 29 January 2007 at 05:10 Sharon

    I am looking forward to uploading rather than post. My last cd took a week to arrive and then a month to process.
    I am also a contributor to Photographers Direct and find their uploading system is very easy and fast (in small bunches) and takes about 48 hours (for quality control)for photos to become live on their site. I know their sales system is different to Alamy and I don't know comparison figures in relation to contributors, but if Alamy upload is anything like theirs then I say 'bring it on'!
    Also, on a different note, to comments about quality and quantity, a lot of sites don't allow microsite photographers to also contribute to their site. I know of photographers who contribute to Alamy and microsites. Would it not be of a benefit to customers and contributors to put a stop to micrositers? Why shop at Alamy when you can get the same photo elsewhere for 50c? It might also make contributors think a bit more seriously about quality rather than quantity.

    Cheers

  35. 29 January 2007 at 10:26 Neil Overy

    I wonder if the delay is partly the result of Alamy not predicting the number of contributors who cannot upload images. Maybe they are re-thinking the whole process to enble uploads and the supply of discs. Upload is simply not an option for me here in Africa - were / are Alamy seriously considering simply dumping those who cannot supply via the internet? I wonder...

    Cheers

  36. 29 January 2007 at 11:26 John La Gette

    At the recent London meeting Alan indicated that alamy now accepted that online uploading would not suit all, and that there were no plans to discontinue cd/dvd submissions, for those with no other option, in the forseeable future.

  37. 29 January 2007 at 18:27 Jeremy Hoare

    CEO James West assured me and around 200 others at the Alamy Event in November that discs will ALWAYS be acceptable.

  38. 29 January 2007 at 21:35 Geoff Kidd

    Sharon's comment on time taken to get images on site should be taken into comparison with other sites such as a certain large site based in Australia (the 'P' word) who chearfully takes many months to get images up on site. Once you have a throughput of images the week here and there doesn't seem so bad. However, like all photographers I want mine up yesterday. I fear the Alamy upload will have me sending a few images a day, probably not what was originally intended.

  39. 30 January 2007 at 06:27 Vittore Buzzi

    I have several thousand images (yes more or less 3500) during this year I start to use IView Media Pro and I start to put all inside it. I hope that your long awaited system will accept upload, keywords and description from IView.

  40. 31 January 2007 at 05:17 Darren

    Now I am confused!

    Yeah so I took off the last three months to sleep under a rock!

    I remember the first time I ever looked at Alamy and it was one page stating they would launch the live site when they had a total of 10'000 images! That was a few years back, now they claim some 7 million +.

    I too agree on the quality control issue that artistic content needs to come before size and making sure there are no dust spots! I remember when the required size was 18mb and I have watched it grow to 48mb.

    Now heres where I get confused....

    Alamy now accepts Jpegs? A fellow contributor and friend sent a disc of 200 Jpegs to Alamy QC and had it rejected last month for 'Wrong file format'

    When I went digital I started to base my catalog around Alamys required size and formats, so now I guess I can change all that?

    I have an agency in Australia that I submit an average of 900 - 1000 images a time to. They require a 25meg Jpeg saved at level 12, on my connection that is always around a 30 - 33 hour upload and we all know how wonderful such an extensive upload can be with the wondering of weather or not the connection will last!

    Why do away with the CD/DVD? It is a proven system, I don't think you are getting too many complaints about it and I for one feel that an FTP system will only encourage the Micro stock players out there to start submitting to you whereas before if they had to goto the trouble of burning a disc and mailing it they usually wouldn't bother! (no offense to micro shooters)

    Like my grandpa always said....if it aint broke don't fix it!

  41. 31 January 2007 at 10:41 tiger

    i haven't sent my first submission to Alamy yet - just burned it to disc tonight for mailing tomorrow - but i can tell you i've been uploading to microstock sites for about three years now and i love it. i can submit one image at a time, or 100. any time i have the inclination and a couple of minutes i can scan my catalogue, find an image or two i think would be appropriate, edit them as needed, and send them scampering off to my agencies by simply dropping them onto a droplet in my Dock. i can climb in bed and submit a few photos before i go to sleep. it's fast, easy, convenient, and - lest we forget - fun. and i don't feel that mailing a CD is any of those things.

    i think that if contributors want it and it continues to work for Alamy, the agency should by all means continue to accept discs via snailmail, but they should absolutely bring on the upload option as well, and as soon as possible. it may not be the method of choice for technophobes or people with slow or unreliable connections, but a lot of us will welcome it with open data streams. i know i will.

    a stock agency that doesn't accept online submissions these days is out of step with the world. it's great that Alamy's working to get up to speed.

  42. 31 January 2007 at 10:58 tiger

    oh, and another thought: i don't think there's any validity to the arguments that the availability of online submission will encourage the submission of inferior images. every photographer still has to demonstrate an understanding of Alamy's quality standards, and an ability to consistently meet those standards, in order to be allowed to submit in the first place. the only way the introduction of online submission would bring about a decrease in the quality of the images accepted to Alamy would be for Alamy to lower their standards when the ftp server goes online. and i doubt that's part of the plan.

  43. 31 January 2007 at 17:09 John Peter

    Darren 40 wrote "Alamy now accepts Jpegs? A fellow contributor and friend sent a disc of 200 Jpegs to Alamy QC and had it rejected last month for 'Wrong file format'". If that was a CD I can understand why the submission was rejected. A Jpeg opening to 48 Mb saved at setting 12 will fill at least 6 Mb on the CD. Multiply that with 200 and you get minimum 1.2 Gb or double what a CD can contain. Your friend should review the quality and size of the individual Jpeg images submitted. They will almost certainly not comply with min. 48Mb 8 bits/channel requirements.

  44. 31 January 2007 at 23:02 Sharon

    Just a thought - would it not be an option for Alamy to only upload small jpeg thumbnails initially, and then have large format files uploaded to a third party site only on confirmation of a sale? That way they would only ever have to handle large format files once a sale has actually been made.

  45. 31 January 2007 at 23:54 Tom

    We have 21st century and alamy still can't do it. Lack of uploading to alamy is serious disturbance in workflow any "digital" photographer. Data storaging on HD getting cheaper. Broadband connections getting faster. If You have problems with database on web server then get proffesionals to fix it. Propably alamy need seriously reorganise internal workflow because opening acces for upload (which now i think is not real technical issue) can seriously accelerate amount of photo stock. Im disapointed.

  46. 02 February 2007 at 04:27 shel

    Folks, take a deep breath. If you don't like Alamy's system, don't use it. Last time I checked it was voluntary.
    I for one cannot see anything other than "convenience" advantages with online uploads--it certainly isn't going to make it quicker to get photos displayed. I think it can be argued that with the inevitable increase in numbers of photos submitted daily, it will lead to an increase in the time it currently takes to get your photos accepted. Dunno about the rest of you, but I don't see that as a particularly positive outcome.

  47. 02 February 2007 at 09:45 Simon Meeds

    For those of us with adequate facilities for the job, uploads will be great. Whether it generates lots of "dross" or not will be a matter of balance.

    Given the size of the files that will have to be uploaded it is possible (though I admit unlikely) that people will be more, rather than less, selective in what they put on Alamy.

    The current system means that files generally aren't sent to Alamy until either a disc-full of worthy images are ready or the worthy images are supplemented with "dross" to fill a disc.

    The result, whatever the time taken by Alamy to QA and post, will be a greater frequency of postings, but not necessarily a greater number overall.

    I stopped sending discs to Alamy on the basis that uploads were imminent and on the basis I was already doing uploads to another library. I want to use Alamy, but it's just not worth the hassle at the moment. When uploads come on line I will have a backlog to send, but I won't be doing it all in one go. Once that's cleared it will be a steady drip-feed.

  48. 06 February 2007 at 05:08 Judie

    The sooner your upload is in place, the happier I'll be. Uploading is so much easier and faster than burning dvds and waiting for them to get from the USA to the UK. Other firms that use upload have the images on their sites within a few days. Makes photographers much happier to know that their work can be seen and purchased rather than sit on hold.

  49. 08 February 2007 at 01:35 pol

    I DO NOT UNDERSTAND. I remember the times, when submitting images only in TIF format, and when the DVDs were not higher in popularity than CDs, You ended up with 10 images per CD (!), and if You were submitting 100 images, it was a GREAT submission. Today I suppose most of You submit 300 JPGs on 1 DVD (!), wishing passing the QC. And YES, if they pass, the may have as ,uchas 300 images on a DVD. But what happens, if the inetrnet uploading starts? YES, more of You, even the pros is going to upload and submit more and more, due to the convenience, as You say. But frankly speaking, how many of You edit deeply Your images, to not end up with 300 per DVD? (of course there are times when even those who submit less, will submit more, as one could have returned from a safari). The point is, I really suppose that Alamy is going to do well, but on its own. They can reach higher and higher sales in the future, normal as they will have more and more images. But have You thought about being lost in those images? I know, good keywording etc etc, will help Your images be found, but think about the numbers Alamy gives, there are about 10000 photographers on the site, and this number grows significantly. I think we may end up (everybody) that we will have a few sales monthly, and will have to divide between ourselves those small amounts. Of course if Alamy stays at least with their DVDs submissions, we may be better (the better), as the client surely finds the similars or just uninteresting images. Happy shooo....

  50. 12 February 2007 at 10:35 Elisabeth Cölfen

    I would *love* to have an Aperture Plugin for Alamy....

  51. 14 February 2007 at 02:41 Peter Fakler

    Planning to use Aperture for image management soon, a plug-in for online upload looks very interesting indeed:

    http://www.apple.com/aperture/resources/exportapi.html

    I notice Getty, Photoshelter, and other players already have Aperture plug-ins.

    Their programmers like Macs, apparently. ;-)

  52. 15 February 2007 at 09:56 Peter Phipp

    Uploading via the current broadband system is really slow. The UPLOAD speed of most connections is only 250K . Download speeds maybe 1-8 meg but they are all the same for uploading. It takes about 1 minute to upload a 1meg JPG. It is much faster to burn a CD and pop it in the post!

  53. 15 February 2007 at 19:15 Simon Meeds

    Peter, my ADSL subscription is not currently unlimited - I have a package of download/upload per month included in my subscription and if I go above it I pay extra. That's no big deal, but... between midnight and 8am it is free! So I would want to set Alamy uploads to go on while I'm asleep and I wouldn't care how long they took as long as they had finished by 8am.

    If I set it up appropriately (and if Alamy's upload is easy - e.g. just an FTP site) it would be no more difficult than dragging and dropping image files during the day and leaving them to upload overnight. Much easier than going down to the post! What's more I would probably do smaller numbers more frequently than by DVD, which means my images get onto Alamy sooner and, if everyone does that, could mean a more even workload for Alamy.

  54. 15 February 2007 at 21:16 Peter Phipp

    The other thing that will bug you is that often your FTP connection will automatically drop off after a certain time set by your ISP, so overnight uploads unattended may not work.

  55. 19 February 2007 at 19:03 Rolf Brenner

    I like the old system very much costs me just one Euro to send a CD from Germany and it is extremly easy. No hazzle with slow or broke connections etc.
    So i have to edit and send my not edited pics as soon as possible.

  56. 27 February 2007 at 13:37 Philippe Hays

    I strongly believe that the option of sending by CDs/DVDs should remain when the upload system is ifinall in place. It is practical and you know when it's gone and received.

    With regards to the Alamy's home page, I agree that the ever-increasing figure looks a right bummer.... The previous home page styling was a lot sweeter on the eyes and at least was welcoming. After all, it's images we are dealing with so why not have any on the page that greets clients and contributors alike ?

  57. 28 February 2007 at 06:50 Chris Rabior

    I sort of figured Alamy would have been giving more frequent updates as to the status of the upload feature. I can't wait for it to come out, as I find it hard to make time to compile a CD of images. I think when it goes online, I'll be aiming for 1 or 2 images daily, and maybe 5-10 on weekends.

    Good to hear that they're still going to accept cd/dvd submissions. It would certainly put the brakes on anyone that didn't have access to high speed internet if they cut that part out.

  58. 01 March 2007 at 02:48 RobT

    I think this is getting pretty lame now guys!

    How come everyone else (Getty, Digital Railroad, PhotoShelter et al) has already had this for ages, yet you guys cant get it sorted?!

    As for those above who cant see the point on online upload: -

    1) Ease
    2) Cost - no more disks and postage fees thanks very much
    3) International - those not based in the UK get their costs reduced even more.
    4) It is the 21st centuary!

    Anyway, Alamy, please get this sorted. Hate to say it, but am considering giving up on you...Photoshelter and Digital Railroad already have my business, you guys dont as I have been twiddling my thumbs waiting for this key feature.

    It does not look good on you when all your competitors, even those who have not been around as long as you (?!) can get this sorted - cant you headhunt someone?!

  59. 03 April 2007 at 12:33 Plantography

    I had stupidly thought that the on-line uploading system would have been in use by the end of last year - 2006!
    I am no longer submitting images to Alamy a great sorrow. The only reason being, that it is so much easier to shove them away online to several other agencies.
    Having been in on the ground floor when Alamy was first formed, and being a regular recipient of "please let us have some more images" type emails from the big A, I cannot tell you how frustrated I am by this mess.
    The problem is, that once you are able to use easier, professional systems to upload with other libraries, then it is an absolute bane to go back to burning again - even with the advent of the JPEG submissions.
    Please Alamy, for God's sake, get this sorted. You/we - for I still feel a part of it - are becoming a laughing stock. (No pun intended!)
    I want so much to be a vibrant part of the outfit. Don't turn me away completely!

  60. 13 April 2007 at 15:59 Chuck franklin

    Hopefully, there has been some progress on this. This is taking way too long.

Add your own comment
Means that we require this information. We respect your privacy and store your details securely. See our privacy policy for more.
Security code picture
No picture? Reload page.
No picture? Reload page.